Controversial Interview Questions

[Pewl]

---

Members don't see this ad.

When asked a rather controversial interview question is it better to take a stance or sit on a fence? I'm thinking topics like abortion, euthanasia, and hmo's.

Perhaps it's best to present both sides and then explain why you pick the side you do? =P

 

[WhatUpDoc!]

Perhaps it's best to present both sides and then explain why you pick the side you do? =P

Exactly. Presenting both sides shows that you are aware of issues that each side brings to the table and it further strengthens your argument when you can address the criticisms against your particular stance. A one-sided argument is really just a rant... least that's how I see it. Also, never sit on a fence unless you are not too familiar with the issues surrounding a certain question(even then, it's probably better to state that your knowledge is insufficient versus giving a half ass, "I can't make up my mind" decision). My bioethics teacher would grill the hell out of us if we didn't take a side while either answering her questions or writing essays. It makes sense though... you don't want wishy washy doctors making wishy washy decisions (especially in a violatile place like the OR). You have to be confident in your choices, and though you may be dead wrong, it is better to make a mistake in confidence, than to screw up because you weren't sure of your self in the first place (damn, my military training is surfacing again ). Anyways... just thought I'd drop some jewels on what I thought about answering such questions... godspeed

 

[Law2Doc]

When asked a rather controversial interview question is it better to take a stance or sit on a fence? I'm thinking topics like abortion, euthanasia, and hmo's.

Perhaps it's best to present both sides and then explain why you pick the side you do? =P

You also need to read your audience. Taking a strong religious based stance on topics like abortion, stem cells etc., is likely going to be problematic with some (probably most) interviewers, but an opinion for or against HMOs rarely will.